Thoms v. Thoms
Citations
- 45 Miss. 263
Syllabus
<p>X UoiEESTEAD EXEMPTIONS—WIPE’S INTEREST THEREIN. — The wife has not ¡sucjhsm interest im the homestead, during the life-time of her husband, as that ¡she cean appeal to acourt of .equity for its protection.</p> <p>2. Same—power op husband to alien it. —The husband has the power to alíen -the homestead, without Ithe concurrence of the wife.</p> <p>3. Exemption laws—sources -op their construction.— The exemption ' laws are of ¡recent introduction into the several states; are purely the' creations of statute law, and the scope and .extent of rights of parties claiming benefit under them, must be determined by reference to the statutes.</p> <p>4. Homestead exemption — ownership op husband — course op descent.—The ¡recognition by the statutes and decisions is full and distinct, that so long as the husband lives, he is the owner of the homestead exemption, sand upon his deeease, the title and interest which he had, passes at once to the widow and children.</p> <p>i§. Same —object dp the statute op 1839—an implication that homestead mat be changed. —The obvious intent of the statute amendatory of ¿he.exemption laws n.a«s.edliin 1867, was to ¡tilKow around the proceeds; of the sale of the homestead for a limited time, the same immunity which attached to the property itself. It also implies that there may be a change of the homestead.</p> <p>6. Same—bules and principles governing in the change op the homestead.—Upon the acquisition of a new homestead, the right to the former is abandoned. If the debtor removes from one to another and is owner of both, the immunity applies to the latter. He may change the homestead without the wife’s consent. But so long as the wife and family occupy the premises, although the husband may have left them, it is still the homestead until the husband has actually acquired and established another.</p> <p>Y. Husband and wife—dealings between them as debtor and creditor —bankruptcy of husband.—The wife, when she married, owned separate property.
Judges: Slmball
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Hileman v. HilemanIndiana Supreme Court· 1882-11-15· cited 29×
- Howell v. BushMississippi Supreme Court· 1877-04-15· cited 14×
- Farmers' Building & Loan Ass'n v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1900-03-31· cited 11×
- Partee v. StewartMississippi Supreme Court· 1874-10-15· cited 11×
- Hand v. WinnMississippi Supreme Court· 1876-07-01· cited 4×
- In re LoganS.D. Mississippi· 1932-10-01
- Muir v. HowellNew Jersey Court of Chancery· 1883-05-15
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Brewer v. WallTexas Supreme Court· 1859-07-01· cited 38×
- Green v. MarksIllinois Supreme Court· 1860-11-15· cited 35×
- Taylor v. BoulwareTexas Supreme Court· 1856-07-01· cited 28×
- Gibson v. FooteMississippi Supreme Court· 1866-10-15· cited 16×
- Sargent v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1855-07-01· cited 13×
- Wally v. WallyMississippi Supreme Court· 1868-04-15· cited 7×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.